Search

Study designRetrospective cohort study.ObjectiveTo compare the outcomes of patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) following spinal fusion with the lowest instrumented vertebra (LIV) at L4/L5 versus S1/ilium.MethodsA multicenter ASD database was evaluated. Patients were categorized into 2 groups based on LIV levels-groups L (fusion to L4/L5) and S (fusion to S1/ilium). Both groups were propensity matched by age and preoperative radiographic alignments. Patient demographics, operative details, radiographic parameters, revision rates, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) scores were compared.ResultsOverall, 349 patients had complete data, with a mean follow-up of 46 months. Patients in group S (n = 311) were older and had larger sagittal and coronal plane deformities than those in group L (n = 38). After matching, 28 patients were allocated to each group with similar demographic, radiographic, and clinical parameters. Sagittal alignment restoration at postoperative week 6 was significantly better in group S than in group L, but it was similar in both groups at the 2-year follow-up. Fusion to S1/ilium involved a longer operating time, higher PJK rates, and greater PJK angles than that to L4/L5. There were no significant differences in the complication and revision rates between the groups. Both groups showed significant improvements in HRQOL scores.ConclusionsFusion to S1/ilium had better sagittal alignment restoration at postoperative week 6 and involved higher PJK rates and greater PJK angles than that to L4/L5. The clinical outcomes and rates of revision surgery and complications were similar between the groups.

Study designComparative cohort study.ObjectiveFactors that influence the lower instrumented vertebra (LIV) selection in adult cervical deformity (ACD) are less reported, and outcomes in the cervicothoracic junction (CTJ) and proximal thoracic (PT) spine are unclear.MethodsA prospective ACD database was analyzed using the following inclusion criteria: LIV between C7 and T5, upper instrumented vertebra at C2, and at least a 1-year follow-up. Patients were divided into CTJ (LIV C7-T2) and PT groups (LIV T3-T5) based on LIV levels. Demographics, operative details, radiographic parameters, and the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) scores were compared.ResultsForty-six patients were included (mean age, 62 years), with 22 and 24 patients in the CTJ and PT groups, respectively. Demographics and surgical parameters were comparable between the groups. The PT group had a significantly higher preoperative C2-C7 sagittal vertical axis (cSVA) (46.9 mm vs 32.6 mm, P = 0.002) and T1 slope minus cervical lordosis (45.9° vs 36.0°, P = 0.042) than the CTJ group and was more likely treated with pedicle-subtraction osteotomy (33.3% vs 0%, P = 0.004). The PT group had a larger correction of cSVA (-7.7 vs 0.7 mm, P = 0.037) and reciprocal change of increased T4-T12 kyphosis (8.6° vs 0.0°, P = 0.001). Complications and reoperations were comparable. The HRQOL scores were not different preoperatively and at 1-year follow-up.ConclusionsThe selection of PT LIV in cervical deformities was more common in patients with larger baseline deformities, who were more likely to undergo pedicle-subtraction osteotomy. Despite this, the complications and HRQOL outcomes were comparable at 1-year follow-up.

Study designRetrospective cohort study.ObjectivesEstablish simultaneous focal and regional corrective guidelines accounting for reciprocal global and pelvic compensation.Methods433 ASD patients (mean age 62.9 yrs, 81.3% F) who underwent corrective realignment (minimum L1-pelvis) were included. Sagittal parameters, and segmental and regional Cobb angles were assessed pre and post-op. Virtual postoperative alignment was generated by combining post-op alignment of the fused spine with the pre-op alignment on the unfused thoracic kyphosis and the pre-op pelvic retroversion. Regression models were then generated to predict the relative impact of segmental (L4-L5) and regional (L1-L4) corrections on PT, SVA (virtual), and TPA.ResultsBaseline analysis revealed distal (L4-S1) lordosis of 33 ± 15°, flat proximal (L1-L4) lordosis (1.7 ± 17°), and segmental kyphosis from L2-L3 to T10-T11. Post-op, there was no mean change in distal lordosis (L5-S1 decreased by 2°, and L4-L5 increased by 2°), while the more proximal lordosis increased by 18 ± 16°. Regression formulas revealed that Δ10° in distal lordosis resulted in Δ10° in TPA, associated with Δ100 mm in SVA or Δ3° in PT; Δ10° in proximal lordosis yielded Δ5° in TPA associated with Δ50 mm in SVA; and finally Δ10° in thoraco-lumbar junction yielded Δ2.5° in TPA associated with Δ25 mm in SVA and no impact on PT correction.ConclusionsOverall impact of lumbar lordosis restoration is critically determined by location of correction. Distal correction leads to a greater impact on global alignment and pelvic retroversion. More specifically, it can be assumed that 1° L4-S1 lordosis correction produces 1° change in TPA / 10 mm change in SVA and 0.5° in PT.

BackgroundPatients with symptomatic cervical deformity (CD) requiring surgical correction often present with hyperkyphosis (HK), although patients with hyperlordotic curves may require surgery as well. Few studies have investigated differences in CD corrective surgery with regard to HK and hyperlordosis (HL).ObjectiveThe objective of the study is to evaluate patterns in treatment for CD patients with baseline (BL) HK and HL and understand how extreme curvature of the spine may influence surgical outcomes.Materials and methodsOperative CD patients with BL and 1-year (1Y) radiographic data were included in the study. Patients were stratified based on BL C2-C7 lordosis (CL) angle: those >1 standard deviation (SD) from the mean (-6.96 ± 21.47°) were hyperlordotic (>14.51°) or hyperkyphotic (

Study designRetrospective cohort study.ObjectiveInvestigate risk factors for PJK including theoretical kyphosis, mechanical loading at the UIV and age adjusted offset alignment.Methods373 ASD patients (62.7 yrs ± 9.9; 81%F) with 2-year follow up and UIV of at least L1 and LIV of sacrum were included. Images of patients without PJK, with PJK and with PJF were compared using standard spinopelvic parameters before and after the application of the validated virtual alignment method which corrects for the compensatory mechanisms of PJK. Age-adjusted offset, theoretical thoracic kyphosis and mechanical loading at the UIV were then calculated and compared between groups. A subanalysis was performed based on the location of the UIV (upper thoracic (UT) vs. Lower thoracic (LT)).ResultsAt 2-years 172 (46.1%) had PJK, and 21 (5.6%) developed PJF. As PJK severity increased, the post-operative global alignment became more posterior secondary to increased over-correction of PT, PI-LL, and SVA (all P < 0.005). Also, a larger under correction of the theoretical TK (flattening) and a smaller bending moment at the UIV (underloading of UIV) was found. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that PI-LL and bending moment offsets from normative values were independent predictors of PJK/PJF in UT group; PT and bending moment difference were independent predictors for LT group.ConclusionsSpinopelvic over correction, under correction of TK (flattening), and under loading of the UIV (decreased bending moment) were associated with PJK and PJF. These differences are often missed when compensation for PJK is not accounted for in post-operative radiographs.

Study designRetrospective cohort study.ObjectiveThis study aims to report the incidence, risk factors, and recovery rate of neurological complications (NC) in patients with adult cervical deformity (ACD) who underwent corrective surgery.MethodsACD patients undergoing surgery from 2013 to 2015 were enrolled in a prospective, multicenter database. Patients were separated into 2 groups according to the presence of neurological complications (NC vs no-NC groups). The types, timing, recovery patterns, and interventions for NC were recorded. Patients' demographics, surgical details, radiographic parameters, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) scores were compared.Results106 patients were prospectively included. Average age was 60.8 years with a mean of 18.2 months follow-up. The overall incidence of NC was 18.9%; of these, 68.1% were major complications. Nerve root motor deficit was the most common complication, followed by radiculopathy, sensory deficit, and spinal cord injury. The proportion of complications occurring within 30 days of surgery was 54.5%. The recovery rate from neurological complication was high (90.9%), with most of the recoveries occurring within 6 months and continuing even after 12 months. Only 2 patients (1.9%) had continuous neurological complication. No demographic or preoperative radiographic risk factors could be identified, and anterior corpectomy and posterior foraminotomy were found to be performed less in the NC group. The final HRQOL outcome was not significantly different between the 2 groups.ConclusionsOur data is valuable to surgeons and patients to better understand the neurological complications before performing or undergoing complex cervical deformity surgery.

ObjectiveThe objective of the study is to investigate which neurologic complications affect clinical outcomes the most following cervical deformity (CD) surgery.MethodsCD patients (C2-C7 Cobb >10°, CL >10°, cSVA >4 cm or chin-brow vertical angle >25°) >18 years with follow-up surgical and health-related quality of life (HRQL) data were included. Descriptive analyses assessed demographics. Neurologic complications assessed were C5 motor deficit, central neurodeficit, nerve root motor deficits, nerve sensory deficits, radiculopathy, and spinal cord deficits. Neurologic complications were classified as major or minor, then: intraoperative, before discharge, before 30 days, before 90 days, and after 90 days. HRQL outcomes were assessed at 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year. Integrated health state (IHS) for the neck disability index (NDI), EQ5D, and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) were assessed using all follow-up time points. A subanalysis assessed IHS outcomes for patients with 2Y follow-up.Results153 operative CD patients were included. Baseline characteristics: 61 years old, 63% female, body mass index 29.7, operative time 531.6 ± 275.5, estimated blood loss 924.2 ± 729.5, 49% posterior approach, 18% anterior approach, 33% combined. 18% of patients experienced a total of 28 neurologic complications in the postoperative period (15 major). There were 7 radiculopathy, 6 motor deficits, 6 sensory deficits, 5 C5 motor deficits, 2 central neurodeficits, and 2 spinal cord deficits. 11.2% of patients experienced neurologic complications before 30 days (7 major) and 15% before 90 days (12 major). 12% of neurocomplication patients went on to have revision surgery within 6 months and 18% within 2 years. Neurologic complication patients had worse mJOA IHS scores at 1Y but no significant differences between NDI and EQ5D (0.003 vs. 0.873, 0.458). When assessing individual complications, central neurologic deficits and spinal cord deficit patients had the worst outcomes at 1Y (2.6 and 1.8 times worse NDI scores, P = 0.04, no improvement in EQ5D, 8% decrease in EQ5D). Patients with sensory deficits had the best NDI and EQ5D outcomes at 1Y (31% decrease in NDI, 8% increase in EQ5D). In a subanalysis, neurologic patients trended toward worse NDI and mJOA IHS outcomes (P = 0.263, 0.163).Conclusions18% of patients undergoing CD surgery experienced a neurologic complication, with 15% within 3 months. Patients who experienced any neurologic complication had worse mJOA recovery kinetics by 1 year and trended toward worse recovery at 2 years. Of the neurologic complications, central neurologic deficits and spinal cord deficits were the most detrimental.

IntroductionPatients with symptomatic cervical deformity (CD) requiring surgical correction often present with hyperkyphosis (HK), though patients with hyperlordotic curves may require surgery as well. Few studies have investigated differences in CD-corrective surgery with regards to HK and hyperlordosis (HL).Materials and methodsOperative CD patients (C2-C7 Cobb >10°, cervical lordosis [CL] >10°, cervical sagittal vertical axis [cSVA] >4 cm, chin-brow vertical angle >25°) with baseline (BL) and 1Y radiographic data. Patients were stratified based on BL C2-7 lordosis (CL) angle: those >1 standard deviation (SD) from the mean (-6.96° ±21.47°) were hyperlordotic (>14.51°) or hyperkyphotic (≤28.43°) depending on directionality. Patients within 1 SD were considered the control group.ResultsOne hundred and two surgical CD pts (61 years, 65%F, 30 kg/m2) with BL and 1Y radiographic data were included. Twenty pts met definitions for HK and 21 pts met definitions for HL. No differences in demographics or disability were noted. HK had higher estimated blood loss (EBL) with anterior approaches than HL but similar EBL with the posterior approach. Op-time did not differ between groups. Control, HL, and HK groups differed in BL TS-CL (36.6° vs. 22.5° vs. 60.7°, P < 0.001) and BL-sagittal vertical axis (SVA) (10.8 vs. 7.0 vs. -47.8 mm, P = 0.001). HL pts had less discectomies, less corpectomies, and similar osteotomy rates to HK. HL had × 3 revisions of HK and controls (28.6 vs. 10.0 vs. 9.2%, respectively, P = 0.046). At 1Y, HL pts had higher cSVA, and trended higher SVA and SS than HK. In terms of BL-upper cervical alignment, HK pts had higher McGregor's-slope (16.1° vs. -3.3°, P = 0.001) and C0-C2 Cobb (43.3° vs. 26.9°, P < 0.001), however postoperative differences in McGregor's slope and C0-C2 were not significant. HK drivers of deformity were primarily C (90%), whereas HL had primary computed tomography (38.1%), upper thoracic (23.8%), and C (14.3%) drivers.ConclusionsHyperlodotic patients trended higher revision rates with greater radiographic malalignment at 1Y postoperative, perhaps due to undercorrection compared to kyphotic etiologies.

ObjectiveAlthough short-term adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis (ASLS) studies favor operative over nonoperative treatment, longer outcomes are critical for assessment of treatment durability, especially for operative treatment, because the majority of implant failures and nonunions present between 2 and 5 years after surgery. The objectives of this study were to assess the durability of treatment outcomes for operative versus nonoperative treatment of ASLS, to report the rates and types of associated serious adverse events (SAEs), and to determine the potential impact of treatment-related SAEs on outcomes.MethodsThe ASLS-1 (Adult Symptomatic Lumbar Scoliosis-1) trial is an NIH-sponsored multicenter prospective study to assess operative versus nonoperative ASLS treatment. Patients were 40-80 years of age and had ASLS (Cobb angle ≥ 30° and Oswestry Disability Index [ODI] ≥ 20 or Scoliosis Research Society [SRS]-22 subscore ≤ 4.0 in the Pain, Function, and/or Self-Image domains). Patients receiving operative and nonoperative treatment were compared using as-treated analysis, and the impact of related SAEs was assessed. Primary outcome measures were ODI and SRS-22.ResultsThe 286 patients with ASLS (107 with nonoperative treatment, 179 with operative treatment) had 2-year and 5-year follow-up rates of 90% (n = 256) and 74% (n = 211), respectively. At 5 years, compared with patients treated nonoperatively, those who underwent surgery had greater improvement in ODI (mean difference -15.2 [95% CI -18.7 to -11.7]) and SRS-22 subscore (mean difference 0.63 [95% CI 0.48-0.78]) (p < 0.001), with treatment effects (TEs) exceeding the minimum detectable measurement difference (MDMD) for ODI (7) and SRS-22 subscore (0.4). TEs at 5 years remained as favorable as 2-year TEs (ODI -13.9, SRS-22 0.52). For patients in the operative group, the incidence rates of treatment-related SAEs during the first 2 years and 2-5 years after surgery were 22.38 and 8.17 per 100 person-years, respectively. At 5 years, patients in the operative group who had 1 treatment-related SAE still had significantly greater improvement, with TEs (ODI -12.2, SRS-22 0.53; p < 0.001) exceeding the MDMD. Twelve patients who received surgery and who had 2 or more treatment-related SAEs had greater improvement than nonsurgically treated patients based on ODI (TE -8.34, p = 0.017) and SRS-22 (TE 0.32, p = 0.029), but the SRS-22 TE did not exceed the MDMD.ConclusionsThe significantly greater improvement of operative versus nonoperative treatment for ASLS at 2 years was durably maintained at the 5-year follow-up. Patients in the operative cohort with a treatment-related SAE still had greater improvement than patients in the nonoperative cohort. These findings have important implications for patient counseling and future cost-effectiveness assessments.

BackgroundFor cervical deformity (CD) surgery, goals include realignment, improved patient quality of life, and improved clinical outcomes. There is limited research identifying patients most likely to achieve all three.ObjectiveThe objective is to create a model predicting good 1-year postoperative realignment, quality of life, and clinical outcomes following CD surgery using baseline demographic, clinical, and radiographic factors.MethodsRetrospective review of a multicenter CD database. CD patients were defined as having one of the following radiographic criteria: Cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA) >4 cm, cervical kyphosis/scoliosis >10°° or chin-brow vertical angle >25°. The outcome assessed was whether a patient achieved both a good radiographic and clinical outcome. The primary analysis was stepwise regression models which generated a dataset-specific prediction model for achieving a good radiographic and clinical outcome. Model internal validation was achieved by bootstrapping and calculating the area under the curve (AUC) of the final model with 95% confidence intervals.ResultsSeventy-three CD patients were included (61.8 years, 58.9% F). The final model predicting the achievement of a good overall outcome (radiographic and clinical) yielded an AUC of 73.5% and included the following baseline demographic, clinical, and radiographic factors: mild-moderate myelopathy (Modified Japanese Orthopedic Association >12), no pedicle subtraction osteotomy, no prior cervical spine surgery, posterior lowest instrumented vertebra (LIV) at T1 or above, thoracic kyphosis >33°°, T1 slope

IntroductionOsteotomies are commonly performed to correct sagittal malalignment in cervical deformity (CD). However, the risks and benefits of performing a major osteotomy for cervical deformity correction have been understudied. The objective of this retrospective cohort study was to investigate the risks and benefits of performing a major osteotomy for CD correction.MethodsPatients stratified based on major osteotomy (MAJ) or minor (MIN). Independent t-tests and Chi-squared tests were used to assess differences between MAJ and MIN. A sub-analysis compared patients with flexible versus rigid CL.Results137 CD patients were included (62 years, 65% F). 19.0% CD patients underwent a MAJ osteotomy. After propensity score matching for cSVA, 52 patients were included. About 19.0% CD patients underwent a MAJ osteotomy. MAJ patients had more minor complications (P = 0.045), despite similar surgical outcomes as MIN. At 3M, MAJ and MIN patients had similar NDI, mJOA, and EQ5D scores, however by 1 year, MAJ patients reached MCID for NDI less than MIN patients (P = 0.003). MAJ patients with rigid deformities had higher rates of complications (79% vs. 29%, P = 0.056) and were less likely to show improvement in NDI at 1 year (0.95 vs. 0.54, P = 0.027). Both groups had similar sagittal realignment at 1 year (all P > 0.05).ConclusionsCervical deformity patients who underwent a major osteotomy had similar clinical outcomes at 3-months but worse outcomes at 1-year as compared to minor osteotomies, likely due to differences in baseline deformity. Patients with rigid deformities who underwent a major osteotomy had higher complication rates and worse clinical improvement despite similar realignment at 1 year.

Cervical deformity morphotypes based on type and location of deformity have previously been described. This study aimed to examine the surgical strategies implemented to treat these deformity types and identify if differences in treatment strategies impact surgical outcomes. Our hypothesis was that surgical strategies will differ based on different morphologies of cervical deformity. Adult patients enrolled in a prospective cervical deformity database were classified into four deformity types (Flatneck (FN), Focal kyphosis (FK), Cervicothoracic kyphosis (CTK) and Coronal (C)), as previously described. We analyzed group differences in demographics, preoperative symptoms, health-related quality of life scores (HRQOLs), and surgical strategies were evaluated, and postop radiographic and HROQLs at 1+ year follow up were compared. 90/109 eligible patients (mean age 63.3 ± 9.2, 64% female, CCI 1.01 ± 1.36) were evaluated. Group distributions included FN = 33%, FK = 29%, CTK = 29%, and C = 9%. Significant differences were noted in the surgical approaches for the four types of deformities, with FN and FK having a high number of anterior/posterior (APSF) approaches, while CTK and C had more posterior only (PSF) approaches. For FN and FK, PSF was utilized more in cases with prior anterior surgery (70% vs. 25%). For FN group, PSF resulted in inferior neck disability index compared to those receiving APSF suggesting APSF is superior for FN types. CTK types had more three-column osteotomies (3CO) (p < 0.01) and longer fusions with the LIV below T7 (p < 0.01). There were no differences in the UIV between all deformity types (p = 0.19). All four types of deformities had significant improvement in NRS neck pain post-op (p < 0.05) with their respective surgical strategies. The four types of cervical deformities had different surgical strategies to achieve improvements in HRQOLs. FN and FK types were more often treated with APSF surgery, while types CTK and C were more likely to undergo PSF. CTK deformities had the highest number of 3COs. This information may provide guidelines for the successful management of cervical deformities.

Study designRetrospective cohort study.ObjectiveDevelop a simple scoring system to estimate proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) risk.MethodsA total of 417 adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients (80% females, 57.8 years) with 2-year follow-up were included. PJK was defined as a >10° kyphotic angle between the upper-most instrumented vertebra (UIV) and the vertebrae 2 levels above the UIV (UIV+2). Based on a previous literature review, the following point score was attributed to parameters likely to impact PJK development: age >55 years (1 point), fusion to S1/ilium (1 point), UIV in the upper thoracic spine (UIV-UT: 1 point), UIV in the lower thoracic region (UIV-LT: 2 points), flattening of the thoracic kyphosis (TK) relative to the lumbar lordosis (LL; ie, ▵LL - ▵TK) greater than 10° (1 point).ResultsAt 2 years, the overall PJK rate was 43%. The odds ratios for each risk factor were the following: age >55 years (2.52), fusion to S1/ilium (5.17), UIV-UT (6.63), UIV-LT (8.24), and ▵LL - ▵TK >10° (1.59). Analysis by risk factor revealed a significant impact on PJK (no PJK vs PJK): age >55 years (28% vs 51%, P < .001), LIV S1/ilium (16.3% vs 51.4%, P < .001), UIV in lower thoracic spine (12.0% vs 38.7% vs 52.9%, P < .001), and a >10° surgical reduction in TK relative to LL increase (40.0% vs 51.5%, P < .001). The PJK rate by point score was as follows: 1 = 17%, 2 = 29%, 3 = 40%, 4 = 53%, and 5 = 69%.ConclusionA pragmatic scoring system was developed that is tied to the increasing risk of PJK. These findings are helpful for surgical planning and preoperative counseling.